J-06 FS3i Air Task Order QASP-v4.1.docx

National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA)

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

Foundation Sustainment Support, Software and Integration Services (FS3i)

Air Task Order

UNCLASSIFIED

July XX, 2025

UNCLASSIFIED

TABLE OF CONTENTS

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

1 INTRODUCTION

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the Foundation Sustainment Support, Software and Integration Services (FS3i) IDIQ Statement of Work (SOW) and the Task Order (TO) Aeronautical (Aero) Safety of Navigation (SoN) Performance Work Statement (PWS). This plan sets forth the procedures, guidelines and surveillance measures the FS3i Government Program Management Office (GPMO) will use to ensure the required performance standards or service levels are achieved by the contractor.

1.1 Purpose

This QASP is a government-developed document used to determine if the contractor’s performance meets the performance standards contained in the contract. The QASP defines the roles and responsibilities of all members of the GPMO, identifies the performance objectives, defines the methodologies used to monitor and evaluate the contractor’s performance, describes quality assurance documentation requirements, and describes the analysis of quality assurance monitoring results.

The contractor is responsible for implementing and delivering performance that meets contract standards using its Quality Control Plan (QCP). The QASP provides the structure for the government’s surveillance of the contractor’s performance to assure that it meets contract standards.

1.2 Performance Management Approach

1.2.1 The PWS structures the acquisition around “what” service or quality level is required, as opposed to “how” the contractor should perform the work (i.e. results, not compliance). This QASP will define the performance management approach taken by the GPMO to monitor and manage the contractor’s performance to ensure the expected outcomes or performance objectives communicated in the PWS are achieved. Performance management rests on developing a capability to review and analyze information generated through performance assessment. The ability to make decisions based on the analysis of performance data is the cornerstone of performance management; this analysis yields information that indicates whether expected outcomes for the project are being achieved by the contractor.

1.2.2 Performance management represents a significant shift from the more traditional quality assurance (QA) concepts in several ways. Performance management focuses on assessing whether outcomes are being achieved and to what extent. This approach migrates away from scrutiny of compliance with the processes and practices used to achieve the outcome. A performance-based approach enables the contractor to play a large role in how the work is performed, as long as the proposed processes are within the stated constraints. The only exceptions to process reviews are those required by law (federal, state, and local) and compelling business situations, such as safety and health. A “results” focus provides the contractor flexibility to continuously improve and innovate over the course of the contract as long as the critical outcomes expected are being achieved and/or the desired performance levels are being met.

1.3 Performance Management Strategy

1.3.1 The contractor is responsible for the quality of all work performed. The contractor measures that quality through the contractor’s own quality control (QC) program. QC is work output, not workers, and therefore includes all work performed under this contract regardless of whether the work is performed by contractor employees or by subcontractors. The contractor’s QCP will set forth the staffing and procedures for self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, and other performance requirements in the PWS. The contractor will develop and implement a performance management system with processes to assess and report its performance to the designated government representative. This QASP enables the government to take advantage of the contractor’s QC program.

1.3.2 The government representative(s) will monitor performance and review performance reports furnished by the contractor to determine how the contractor is performing against communicated performance objectives. The government will make determination regarding incentives based on performance measurement metric data and notify the contractor of those decisions. The contractor will be responsible for making required changes in processes and practices to ensure performance is managed effectively.

2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1 Program Manager

The PM has the ultimate authority for the success or failure of the program and represents the Agency to the awarded vendor. The PM’s authorized representatives assist in administering the program contract. The PM is responsible for general/technical and financial administration of the program and to ensure proper government surveillance of the contractor’s performance. The PM is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or authorize any contractual changes on the government’s behalf. Any changes the contractor deems may affect contract price, terms, or conditions shall be referred to the CO for action. The PM and additional representatives will have the responsibility for completing QA monitoring forms used to document the inspection and evaluation of the contractor’s work performance. Government surveillance may occur under the inspection of services clause for any service relating to the contract.

2.2 Contracting Officer

The contracting officer (CO) is responsible for monitoring contract compliance, contract administration, and cost control and for resolving any differences between the observations documented by the Program Manager (PM) and/or Contracting Officer's Representative (COR), and the contractor. The CO will designate one full-time COR as the government authority for performance management. The number of additional representatives serving as technical inspectors/monitors depends on the complexity of the services measured, as well as the contractor’s performance, and must be identified and designated by the CO.

2.1 The Contracting Officer’s Representative

The Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) is designated in writing by the CO to act as his or her authorized representative to assist in administering a contract. COR limitations are contained in the written appointment letter. The COR is responsible for general/technical administration of the project and ensures proper government surveillance of the contractor’s performance. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the government’s behalf. Any changes that the contractor deems may affect contract price, terms, or conditions shall be referred to the CO for action. The COR will have the responsibility for completing QA monitoring forms used to document the inspection and evaluation of the contractor’s work performance. Government surveillance may occur under the inspection of services clauses (Reference Part I, Section E of the contract) for any service relating to the contract.

3 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

3.1 Surveillance Techniques

In an effort to minimize the performance management burden, simplified surveillance methods shall be used by the government to evaluate contractor performance when appropriate. These are the primary methods of surveillance:

· 100% Inspection – Each month, within 5 business days following contractor delivery, the COR will review the generated documentation to ensure compliance to quality performance While it is the Government’s intent to conduct inspections 100% of the time, the volume of inspections may exceed the capacity of the GPMO. Should that happen the GPMO will conduct inspections in accordance with the priorities established by the Government Program Manager (GPM)

· Periodic Inspection – The COR typically performs periodic inspections on a monthly basis

· Random Sampling – At the CO/COR’s discretion, the government may review inspect documents generated by the contractor, without notice.

· Validation – manual or automated testing demonstrates that the software baseline is behaving as expected by the users

· Customer Feedback – described in 3.1.1

3.1.1 Customer Feedback

The contractor is expected to establish and maintain professional communication between its employees and customers. The primary objective of this communication is customer satisfaction. Customer Satisfaction is the most significant external indicator of the success and effectiveness of all services provided and can be measured through customer surveys.

Performance management drives the contractor to be customer focused through initially and internally addressing customer feedback and investigating the issues and/or complaints but the customer always has the option to communicate feedback/complaints to the CO and COR, as opposed to the contractor.

Customer feedback/complaints may also be obtained either from the results of formal customer satisfaction surveys or from random customer surveys.

4 QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

4.1 The Performance Management Feedback Loop

The performance management feedback loop begins with the communication of expected outcomes. Performance standards are expressed in the PWS and assessed using the performance monitoring techniques shown in Attachment 1 – Performance Requirements Summary.

4.2 Monitoring Forms

The government’s QA surveillance, accomplished by the COR, will be reported using the monitoring form in Attachment 2 – Sample Quality Assurance Monitoring Form. This form, when completed, will document the government’s assessment of the contractor’s performance under the contract to ensure that the required results are being achieved. The COR and CO will retain a copy of all completed QA surveillance forms.

5 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT

5.1 Determining Performance

The Government will use the monitoring methods cited in Attachment 1 to determine whether the performance standards/service levels/AQLs have been met. If the contractor has not met the minimum requirements, it may be asked to develop a corrective action plan to show how and by what date it intends to bring performance up to the required levels.

5.2 Reporting

At the end of each month, the COR will prepare a written report for the CO and GPM, summarizing the overall results of the quality assurance surveillance of the contractor’s performance. This written report, will include the contractor’s submitted report and the completed quality assurance monitoring forms (Attachment 2 – Sample Quality Assurance Monitoring Form), will become part of the QA documentation. It will enable the government to evaluate whether the contractor is meeting the stated objectives and/or performance standards, including cost/technical/scheduling objectives. This report will be used for purposes of the contractor’s annual Performance Assessment Report (PAR).

5.3 Reviews and Resolution

5.3.1 The CO or PM may require the contractor’s project manager, or a designated alternate, to meet with the CO and/or PM and other government personnel as deemed necessary to discuss performance evaluation. The PM will define a frequency of in-depth reviews with the contractor, including appropriate self-assessments by the contractor; however, if the need arises, the contractor will meet with the PM and/or COR as often as required or per the contractor’s request. The agenda of the reviews may include the following:

· Monthly performance assessment data and trend analysis

· Issues and concerns of both parties

· Projected outlook for upcoming months and progress against expected trends, including a corrective action plan analysis

· Recommendations for improved efficiency and/or effectiveness

· Issues arising from the performance monitoring processes

5.3.2 The COR will coordinate and communicate with the contractor to resolve issues and concerns regarding marginal or unacceptable performance.

5.3.3 The COR, CO and GPM along with the contractor will jointly formulate tactical and long- term courses of action. Decisions regarding changes to metrics, thresholds, or service levels will be clearly documented. Changes to service levels, procedures, and metrics will be incorporated as a contract modification at the convenience of the CO.

ATTACHMENT 1 – PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

The Performance Objectives and associated Acceptable Performance Levels (APLs) detailed in the table below are referenced from Appendix A– Aero SoN Performance Work Statement Requirements.

PERFORMANCE METRICS- This Table is UNCLASSIFIED

Integration

WBS 2.3

WBS 2.15

WBS 2.26

WBS 2.23

WBS 2.23

WBS 2.4

WBS 2.23

WBS 2.24

Priority DRs corrected within 72 hours.

WBS 2.25

Restore Test and Development Environments within 4 hours of an outage during the operating hours.

Provide updates twice daily during business hours for any outages or degradations.

Notify Stakeholders no later than 20 min after identification of an outage or degradation.

Maintain 99.9% availability for every Dev/Test environment.

WBS 2.32

Deliver the ITDR plan and capability prior to TRR.

Test the ITDR during TRR

Restore environment, data, and/or services NLT five working days in the event of disaster. Meet 100% of NGA ITDR policy/requirements.

Software Maintenance Services

WBS 3.16-3.19

Operations Support Services

WBS 5.2

WBS 5.15

WBS 5.4

90% of deployments performed shall be automated, fully or with minimal manual action. As a percentage of deployments that can be automated using Government furnished DevSecOps tools as outlined in the SOP document[footnoteRef:1] [1: Foundation GEOINT Capability Delivery Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)]

Periodic Inspection

WBS 5.23

Paragraph 6.3

WBS 5.23

WBS 5.24

WBS 5.24

Operational Priority 2 DR’s corrected within 72 hours.

100% Inspection

WBS 5.23

WBS 5.26

Maintain 99% subsystems compliant with NGA monitoring directives.

Provide operational status for 99% operational sub-systems, updated hourly during business hours.

100% Inspection

(Maintain operational availability for deployed services.)

Paragraph 6.3

WBS 5.25

WBS 5.25

WBS 5.25

WBS 5.25

WBS 5.32

WBS 5.3

ATTACHMENT 2 –SAMPLE QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM

SERVICE OR STANDARD

SURVEY PERIOD

SURVEILLANCE METHOD (CHECK):

· Random Sampling 100% Inspection Periodic Inspection Customer Feedback

LEVEL OF SURVEILLANCE (CHECK):

· Monthly Quarterly As Needed

PERCENTAGE OF ITEMS SAMPLED DURING SURVEY PERIOD: % ANALYSIS OF RESULTS:

OBSERVED SERVICE PROVIDER PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT RATE:

SERVICE PROVIDER’S PERFORMANCE (CHECK) Meet Standards Does Not Meet Standards

NARRATIVE OF PERFORMANCE DURING SURVEY PERIOD:

PREPARED BY: DATE:

J-3 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

ATTACHMENT 3 – CTIP Checklist

Combating Trafficking in Persons (FAR 52.222-50)

1. Verify that the contractor has conducted training or kept records with employee signature as understanding of U.S. Zero Tolerance policy.

Review meeting/training/signature records as proof of contractor to employee notification.

violation matches those in FAR 52.222-50(e)(1)

3. Verify that the contractor has documented the number of violations to date (if any) and documented actions taken (if any) Review violations and document contractor actions image1.jpeg